VitaNuo wrote: > Thanks, the implementation mostly looks good. I've left a lot of comments, > but they are mostly NITs. One major thing that we need to change is the way > we test this, see the comment about relying on jq.
Sure, changed to `FileCheck`. > Another thought that crossed my mind is that we are actually heavily > optimizing for minimization, but use a name that creates an impression we > might care about something else. I don't have great ideas there, but maybe > -dump-minimization-hints would be appropriate? Any thoughts on this? TBH I would prefer not to do that. Although we're doing this for minimization, there's nothing particular about the deserialized ranges or the JSON format that we produce that limits its use to minimization. If someone else find this useful, I would only welcome that. So in this sense, I'd prefer not to have a very specific name. > It would be great to link to the code consuming those hints in cvise too to > add some context on why we are doing this. We should do this as a followup, I think. The C-Vise code is undergoing too much change to link to a place that is likely to be outdated very soon. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/133910 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
